In a victory for quadrilaterals everywhere, the NHL’s general managers voted today to keep the “trapezoid,” the lines that limit where the goalie can handle the puck behind the net. From the stories I read in Toronto, some thought the trapezoid would be removed as a way to increase player safety. The thought was that if more goalies played the pucks, fewer defensemen would have to, and fewer defensemen would get smashed/injured by forecheckers.
The league’s general managers meet four times a year, and this round of meetings will conclude tomorrow with the hottest of the hot-button topics: hits to the head. Will they be banned? It’s a tough issue. Personally, I think the hit from behind, specifically, is a better thing to discuss. Hits to the head, they happen, but reckless hits from behind can be avoided. So it will be interesting to see what the owners come up with, especially with the trapezoid off the table. Everyone seems uncomfortable with the subject. It seems as though team executives would rather not legislate against certain types of hits, but hesitate to appear heartless when it comes to injured players. The feeling out of Toronto was that hits to the head would not be outright banned.
They’re just waiting for Brodeur to retire..
Frankly the way I’ve seen our netminders handle the puck it’s best to leave it in there.
[Reply]
As was discussed on the “Hot Stove” the other night and I tend to agree, the trapazoid was a way of punishing a few goalies that could really handle the puck well more than anything else. I would say that it is close to when college basketball banned the slam dunk when Lou Alcindor aka Kareem Abdul Jabbar was playing. One would think that a league would want to have more well rounded players, instead the NHL decides that they punish those who can do something better than average.
[Reply]
i hate parallelograms more than trapezoids.
[Reply]
It’s imperfect (just short of “sucks”) but it’s better than before, making it easier to defend the goaltender’s life. As far as I’m concerned, though, they should just tell him if he leaves the crease, he’s just another skater (and if hit while in the crease, into the box.) That’ll keep ‘em in the crease!
[Reply]
I agree with Matt F. Also, if there is concern about defensemen getting smashed/injured on the touch-up, there are existing rules that should be called in those situations (hitting from behind, elbowing, etc.). It’s just a matter of whether the referees feel like calling the penalty.
[Reply]
Don’t like the trapezoid. Wasn’t it supposed to (atleast publicly) increase scoring because goalies couldn’t stop fore checks before they started in the corners?
I seem to remember more goals because of goalie screwups than there are these days. Wonder if there was any way to prove which causes more scoring.
Either way, I hope they didn’t keep it because they think it increases scoring and excitement. The only thing that increases scoring and excitement are the quick face-offs and that you get a penalty for touching anyone who doesn’t have the puck.
Now, what I would REALLY like to see is the trapezoid, but for a totally different reason. Keep the trapezoid, but the goalies can still play the puck anywhere. The caveat is that behind the goal line and outside of the trapezoid they are fair game.
[Reply]
Get rid of it…plain and simple. One reason fo rit being there is that goalies are protected…i understand…but…get rid of it. Tell goalies if you leave the crease you can get hit like everyone else. You want to travel ? Fine…take the hit.
[Reply]
Keep the trapezoid. I hate it when you dump the puck in the corner and want to start a forecheck by getting pressure on the d-man that goes in first to get the puck, but you can’t because the goalie goes out to the corner and plays it instead, and we all know you can’t hit a goalie that’s in the corner, and you never will be able to either. If they eliminate the trapezoid, they eliminate the forecheck…and it’s back to boring hockey.
[Reply]
I will most likely get bashed here…but i hate this. Old goalies from the past must be rolling over in thier graves. Before they wore a mask ( the true studs )….i know the game has changed …but…. a few years ago, before we had this problem. A goalie would leave his net, get touched, and flop around for five minutes to draw a penalty…THATS CRAP ! You dont want to get hit…stay in goal. Leave the net…get hit…end of story.
[Reply]
Good to hear about the head hits. I hope they do it right. On ice should be a double minor if deemed unintentional. Major if deemed intentional, like an elbow or if the hitter leaves his feet. Then off ice they can determine if an additional fine or suspension is needed. The level of injury or lack there of should have no bearing on penalty and/or fine/suspension.
[Reply]
Excuse me, but how do you “ban” hits to the head? As mentioned, they happen and usually unintentionally, but how do you ban them? You can penalize and fine a play that performs a hit to the head, but they will still happen. 6’5″ player, meets 5’10″… shoulder could hit the guys head and it happens to be a clean hit. Do you fine or suspend a guy because he is taller than another player? Anyways, I thought we determined that most head injuries were coming from the seamless glass and contact with the ice. Let’s not mention that hockey helmets are a joke.
[Reply]
Well I’m not sure our opinion on this really matters since they’ve already decided BUT..
I would love to see the trapezoid go …. since the 2 line pass foul is gone it would liven up the game to see a Quick throw the puck deep in the neutral zone to a full speed Kopi.
[Reply]
Get rid of the trapezoid! If you don’t want goaltenders playing the puck, take away their sticks! Don’t handcuff a goaltender that helps his team because he is good or great at playing the puck with his stick.
[Reply]
I agree with you Matt. Taking away the trapezoid would speed and liven up the game, making it more exciting.
[Reply]
OK, I just saw this. My apologies if this has been posted before. The NHL Flowchart for Suspensions.
http://www.downgoesbrown.com/2009/11/nhl-suspensions.html
I have been edjumacated.
[Reply]
Just watched the HHoF induction ceremony. I felt Luc’s sincerity when he said we would have a cup in LA. What’s more, I believe him.
Cynic,
That flow chart is hilarious! Thanks for that, gave me and my wife a good laugh!
[Reply]
Cynic,
Thanks for that flow chart! Thats made me laugh out loud literally! Good find
[Reply]
You don’t want to get checked, stay in the crease…I certainly agree with the sentiment 100%. The problem is, we’re not NHL owners with millions riding on that one check that will end a goaltender’s career (sorry, reality bites.) So, the owners, much as with QBs, will continue to come up with special rules to protect “special” players.
Yes, the flowchart is epic!
[Reply]
Very disappointed that the GMs don’t see the stupidity in the trapezoid. Punishing Brodeur and Turco for being skilled is sad.
[Reply]
Credit Jsaquella on HockeyBuzz for the flowchart link. He made me see the light. LOL
[Reply]
The other reason to remove the trapezoid: It’s just one more thing which makes hockey harder to understand for new/casual fans. Getting rid of 2-line passes was huge (it’s hard to imagine hockey with it now) the trapezoid is just unnatural and weird…like the evolution in the pronounciation of Robert Lang/Lung/Lang’s name.
[Reply]
3 fold answer for the trapezoid.
1. get rid of it
2. allow checking of goalies outside crease
3. abolish instigator rule
here’s the math:
1+2+3= entertaining hockey!
[Reply]
Matt– quick would end up turning over to the other team for an easy goal
[Reply]
I agree with you Belexes!
[Reply]
On the old game show “Scrabble,” words were often clued with general statements that were made specific to one group in an attempt to mislead. An example: “Some girls stop doing it at eighteen.” G _ _ _ I N G. The answer would be golfing (not growing), the idea being that everyone (not just girls) stops after the eighteenth hole. So one day the clue was, “Most brides, when polled, report it’s indescribable.” And the answer was T R A P E Z O I D. Even with all the letters up, the contestant rang in and sort of – well, more asked than said, “Trapezoid?” Chuck Woolery truly did not understand the clue and spent ten minutes humorously berating the writers (“Who was this? Jan?”). The idea being, most people at large could not correctly describe a trapezoid.
[Reply]
“In a victory for quadrilaterals everywhere” …omg that made me laugh.
But I still hate the trapezoid rule. Let the goalies play the puck.
[Reply]
“The trapezoid is better than the pyramid because there are more people on top.” (Fun with Dick and Jane)
[Reply]
I’m an old schooler myself in the netminding dept. I can’t agree more that the trapazoid rule needs to be revised. Letting the goalie become fair game, at his own risk, will make them think twice about roaming from the net to play the puck. It’ll add that more excitment to the play and quite possibly open up the goal scoring.
[Reply]